dm-l

dm-l@uleth.ca

2 participants
2789 discussions

Junicode semi-final
by Peter Baker 01 Jul '05

01 Jul '05

I can now say with a fair amount of confidence that the next version of Junicode, 0.6.5, is in stable condition. That is, it installs correctly under Windows, Linux and the latest version of OS X, and all the programming works, to the extent that I have been able to test it. Get it at this URL: http://www.engl.virginia.edu/OE/junicode/junicode.html Click the "Beta" link at the very bottom. I will not promote this to official release status until I have brought the documentation up to date, but the fonts themselves should not change. As has generally been the case, the Regular style is much fuller than the bold, italic, and bold italic. When I get urgent requests for bold or italic characters to match the regular ones, I do try to comply. Many thanks to Mark Stansbury for stress-testing under OS X. Peter Baker

1 0

Re: dm-l Digest, Vol 11, Issue 6
by Martin Holmes 01 Jul '05

01 Jul '05

Hi there, Responding to Dieter's post below: first I'd like to thank you for your XDOM libraries, which I'm beginning to use for some of my Delphi projects. Great work! I agree that scholars currently have little to gain from developing tools, from the point of view of their academic careers. However, there's another group of individuals like me, who are working in the academic context as programmers and in similar roles, who do this kind of work for a living. John Bradley would be another good example. Our work initially got going in the realm of language teaching support (Computer-Assisted Language Learning), giving birth to quite widely-used tools such as our Hot Potatoes programs; recently, we've morphed from a Language Centre into a Humanities Computing and Media Centre, and our work is focused more and more on HC, digital documents and encoding. Our experience has been that when we release tools which gain approval and acceptance, the university is generally pleased and appreciative; they've also helped us spin off some of our work commercially, to everyone's financial benefit. While individual departments and tenure committees may not (yet) give much weight to this kind of work, other parts of the university administration are more supportive. The emergence of centres such as ours, which have relatively stable workforces (as opposed to the ad-hoc temporary hires associated with grant-supported projects) means that tools tend to be rewritten and updated steadily, which gives them more credibility (Hot Potatoes is now at version 6, for example, and has been out since 1997). This model of tool development, where a centre with long-term staff creates tools for the use of several projects, and maintains them over time, is much more likely to be successful than the case where an academic working on a temporarily-funded project hires in programmers to write something for a specific purpose, releases it, then moves on to the next piece of research, leaving the code to languish like an abandoned vehicle in a field (which is what "open-sourcing" a project often turns out to mean). Cheers, Martin At 09:37 AM 29/06/2005, you wrote: >Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2005 13:14:24 +0200 >From: Dieter K?hler <d.k(a)philo.de> >Subject: [dm-l] Tools for humanities computing (WAS: Are markup > languages obsolete?) >To: dm-l(a)uleth.ca >Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.0.20050624114827.025b2050(a)pop3.philo.de> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed > >I often think that the free "tools" aspect had been underestimated in >humanities computing. Of course, there exist a couple of good examples like >the TEI XSLT style sheets or some open source archival software etc. >Nevertheless, the situation is not satisfactory and I wonder what are its >causes and by which means it could possibly be improved. Briefly >summarized the main causes, I can think of, are the following: > >- Most software development in the humanities takes place in an ad hoc >fashion: People have specific problems and develop specific solutions. >- There is a lack of institutional support for developing tools for others. >Tools are only by-products. >- If there is institutional support for developing tools for others, these >tools need to be sold in order to re-finance the work. >- It is not advisable for a scholar trying to build an academic career on >developing tools for humanities computing. >- There exists no academic infrastructure *focused* on developing tools for >the humanities, ie. a specific society, journal and annual conference. > >Since one of my main research interests is considered with the development >of tools for humanities computing, I would be very interested in the >opinions of others on the above list of causes. Perhaps together we could >find ways to improve the situation. > >Dieter Köhler > >Institute of Philosophy and >Centre for Multimedia Studies >University of Karlsruhe >Germany ______________________________________ Martin Holmes University of Victoria Humanities Computing and Media Centre mholmes(a)uvic.ca martin(a)mholmes.com mholmes(a)halfbakedsoftware.com http://www.mholmes.com http://web.uvic.ca/hcmc/ http://www.halfbakedsoftware.com

7 6

[Fwd: Announcing Easymacs: an all-in-one Emacs configuration for new users.]
by Daniel Paul O'Donnell 30 Jun '05

30 Jun '05

FYI. Emacs is a very useful editor for XML work, but has a reputation for being difficult to learn to use. The "TEI-Emacs" mentioned in the e-mail, is a customised version of Emacs distributed by the Text Encoding Initiative (the major flavour of XML used in our area). I've not tried this editor out yet, as I don't see any information on whether it will conflict irreparably with my working version of the latest TEI emacs. But especially for those who have not invested a lot of time in learning the original version, this might be worth looking into. I've not added this to our wiki entry on XML editors yet (http://sql.uleth.ca/dmorgwiki/index.php/XML_Editors), nor is there a project page for it (http://sql.uleth.ca/dmorgwiki/index.php/Projects). But I will try to get to it toot sweet. Currently the XML editors page lists emacs (regular) and Oxygen (a commercial editor) as options. People often have quite strong feelings about their editors. If you know of/love another, perhaps you might like to add information about it? -dan -- Dr. Daniel Paul O'Donnell Associate Professor of English Director, Digital Medievalist Project University of Lethbridge Lethbridge AB T1K 3M4 vox: +1 (403) 329-2377 fax: +1 (403) 382-7191 URL: http://people.uleth.ca/~daniel.odonnell/ Digital Medievalist Project: http://www.digitalmedievalist.org/ (@wiglaf)

1 0

Junicode beta posted
by Peter Baker 29 Jun '05

29 Jun '05

By way more (I hope) of a plea for help than of self-promotion: I've posted a beta of Junicode 0.6.5 on my website www.engl.virginia.edu/OE/junicode/junicode.html and I'm hoping that some members of this list will want to download and test it. I had hoped to completely implement the Medieval Unicode Font Initiative recommendation, but decided I should release it half-done. The latest version of OS X seems much pickier about fonts than earlier versions and some bugs in the current version were causing it to be rejected. Since I still can't test on OS X myself, I'm particularly hoping for help from Mac users. Though MUFI is not complete in this version, it nevertheless includes some substantial revisions. The number of characters in the "Regular" style has gone from something over 1400 to 1756, in large part because the whole of "Latin Extended Additional" (U+1E00 - U+1EF9) has now been implemented. In addition, "hinting" of the Regular and Bold styles has progressed far enough that nearly all documents produced by medievalists will look good on a computer screen. To download, scroll to the bottom and click on the link for the test version of 0.6.5. Sorry, no documentation yet; but members of this list will know what to do. Thanks, Peter

2 1

re: [dm-l] Are markup languages obsolete?
by Patti Cossard 25 Jun '05

25 Jun '05

Hi, Facsimiles, high quality or otherwise, are in no way a substitution for a critically edited text. This is true in a print framework and remains true in a digital frame. Also, within scholarly economics, facsimiles are only reproductions, and while helping with dissemination, they do not add to critical knowledge. On the other hand critical editing is highly valued because it does add to knowledge. Digital markup and editing adds value to this already highly valued product because it facilitates searching, analysis, computer visualization of the results of that analysis, archiving and adaptive reuse by other scholars. Scholarly communication is undergoing a dramatic transformation. The abrogation of responsibilty by the scholarly community to strategically invest in technological advances to publish our most valued communication has led to a crisis. Relying upon commercial ventures to provide technical infrastructure is in conflict with the best interest of healthy collegial communication. The result is that the publication process is at risk of being distorted because commercial considerations often overshadow the intellectual goals of the product. Because these business practices are intertwined with the implementation of new technologies and its infrastructure, the problem of maintaining peer reviewed publication as the primary venue for scholarly discourse is becoming ever more complex . New technologies could lead scholarly communication down two different paths: One offers a rare opportunity to expand and accelerate the free flow of scholarly knowledge while the other could result in control and limitations on its dissemination. The transformation has both institutional and structural implications for the entire University community. The humanities community has a role to play in this transformation. As I see it, standards based structural language or computer skill, is essential to the health of scholarly economy as it provides a sustainable model for scholarly communication. And, it goes beyond just the markup language or information technology skill itself. The TEI consortium provides a community in which tools and knowledge are shared openly. It is at the forefront of creating a new realm of scholarly communication, blending the present with the past. Standards are the way the humanities will be able to fulfill a responsibility to making sure that their products are archivable, without which they are only ephemeral. Standards are a way to communicate with the technologies that are central to digital libraries and institutional digital repositories. Standards are a way to evaluate the quality of digital products. Being knowledgeable of them will be essential to ongoing professional professorial life, as university self-governance requires that faculty participate in service on APT committeess, overseeing strategic infrastructure investment, and, for humanities in particular, engagement with the library. I know this is probably at a higher level of conceptualization than your original question demanded, but I see all these issues as being intertwined. As the Chair of the Committee on Electronic Resources for the Medieval Academy, I've been thinking on a policy level and feel it is imperative for computing medievalists to be recognized as central to the future of our field. Pax et bonum, Patricia Kosco Cossard, M.A., M.L.S. currently Resident Fellow at MITH 5-8506 Subject Librarian for Architecture and Historic Preservation University of Maryland Libraries College Park, MD 20742 (301) 405-6316 office (301) 314-9583 fax pcossard(a)umd.edu Th

3 2

Re: [dm-l] Are markup languages obsolete?
by Norman Hinton 24 Jun '05

24 Jun '05

1) a lot of people I know would be very happy working with a good facsimile, or would not want a critical edition that changed the manuscript readings in any way. (In fact, I know a lot of theorists [not I] who hold that monkeying with the reading of an Ms is unwarranted intrusion to keep the profession alive and 'needed') 2) no one asked us to play a role in the development of writing systems, or printing, or typewriters, or book production. One could argue that this time we are lucky to have a hand in the development of computer methods - but one could just as easily argue that there is no more reason for us to do that than there was when those other methods of textual communication were being developed....

2 1

Are markup languages obsolete?
by Daniel Paul O'Donnell 22 Jun '05

22 Jun '05

Hi all, As some of you know, I write a column on electonica medievalia for Heroic Age, a superb online journal in its 8th year. My next column is due soon, and while I was originally planning to write on TEI P5, something that came up on Medtext has sat in my head for the last several weeks: it was an email from Judith Bolton Halloway (I think it was) that described markup languages and protocols like the TEI as obsolete in the face of high quality manuscript facsimiles (I'm paraphrasing and so might not have it exactly right). What I'm wondering is not so much whether markup languages are obsolete (that's demonstrably not true in a technical sense), but whether there is an easy argument that they are worth it for a low tech humanities oriented person to learn. I'm thinking here of the issues raised in Peter Robinson's article in the premier issue of DM, various talks I've given or heard at conferences. So here's a question: when is it worth it to devote time to learning a complex language like TEI--or any other standards based structural language or computer skill (and when is it not)? What should one expect to get out of going to the trouble of learning them? And what do you lose by (or simply what is the cost of) doing so? I suppose this might be a question for Humanist, but I thought I'd try it out here given the medieval focus of HA. I'm not (necessarily) looking for answers to my topic for my column, but I'm interested in mulling the question over with others before I set cursor to screen. -dan -- Dr. Daniel Paul O'Donnell Associate Professor of English Director, Digital Medievalist Project University of Lethbridge Lethbridge AB T1K 3M4 vox: +1 (403) 329-2377 fax: +1 (403) 382-7191 URL: http://people.uleth.ca/~daniel.odonnell/ Digital Medievalist Project: http://www.digitalmedievalist.org/ (@wiglaf)

5 6

Re: [dm-l] Are markup languages obsolete?
by Daniel Paul O'Donnell 21 Jun '05

21 Jun '05

On Tue, 2005-21-06 at 21:43 +0100, Lou Burnard wrote: > Daniel Paul O'Donnell wrote: > > > So here's a question: when is it worth it to devote time to learning a > >complex language like TEI--or any other standards based structural > >language or computer skill (and when is it not)? What should one expect > >to get out of going to the trouble of learning them? And what do you > >lose by (or simply what is the cost of) doing so? > > > > > > The way you pose these questions seemsd to me to indicate that you have > already taken up a position... but for the record, let me assert again > that I think those who do not understand the technologies by which > information is now processed and shared across the globe are thereby > marginalised. If you care about texts and the communication of their > meanings, then you care about markup, one way or another. I don't claim > that our current crop of technologies for handling the meanings of texts > are the best yet, but they won't get any better if the people who know > most about extraction of meaning and its representation say "oh, I'm > just a low grade humanist and I can't bother my pretty little head with > this computer stuff!". Or, to be more exact, they won't be made better > by those who take that attitude. They'll be made better by people who > are willing to understand enough of the technology to bend it to their > needs. When were things ever any different? I guess I've taken a position in that I've committed myself a bit to the field over the last couple of years and it would be kind of disturbing to discover I thought it was all a waste of time. But the challenge "markup languages are obsolete"--or perhaps better phrased, "are a waste of effort for someone who is not intrinsically interested in them" seems such a head on challenge, I thought I'd see what happens if you really ask the question. My experience has been that people who find structural markup useful find it very useful and the arguments for learning and using it almost beyond obvious... and those on the outside don't understand at all why anybody would bother. So I thought, alright what non-trivial reasons as there for learning what is in essence a third discipline for most editors (i.e. disciplinary skills, editing, and markup). -d -- Dr. Daniel Paul O'Donnell Associate Professor of English Director, Digital Medievalist Project University of Lethbridge Lethbridge AB T1K 3M4 vox: +1 (403) 329-2377 fax: +1 (403) 382-7191 URL: http://people.uleth.ca/~daniel.odonnell/ Digital Medievalist Project: http://www.digitalmedievalist.org/ (@wiglaf)

1 0

RE: [dm-l] Searching Latin texts and orthographical variants
by Binkley, Peter 21 Jun '05

21 Jun '05

PS, you might want to look at the Perl port of Lucene: http://search.cpan.org/~strytoast/Plucene-1.0/ <http://search.cpan.org/~strytoast/Plucene-1.0/> . All you would need to do is come up with an Analyzer that runs the transformation rules. We've had good experiences with the original Java Lucene, but I don't know whether the Perl version does as well.. Peter

1 0

RE: [dm-l] Searching Latin texts and orthographical variants
by Binkley, Peter 21 Jun '05

21 Jun '05

Hi Jim! I don't think the computational linguistics has to get too involved when you're dealing with scholastic Latin. If -nt[vowel]- gets converted to -nc[vowel]- and -ae- gets converted to -e-, for example, then you're well on the way. You lose some fine granularity in your search, but that's going to happen anyway when you're dealing with heterogeneous materials like what you describe. I worked out a few rules like this for a processing routine in Pascal years ago for work on 14th century Latin preaching (Bromyard), and I'd be happy to dig out the code and send the relevant bits. If you do it with hashes and you don't have rules like this, won't you have to create the association between scientia and sciencia (and all other pairs) explicitly? Peter ________________________________ From: dm-l-bounces(a)uleth.ca [mailto:dm-l-bounces@uleth.ca] On Behalf Of James R. Ginther Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2005 12:43 PM To: dm-l(a)uleth.ca Subject: [dm-l] Searching Latin texts and orthographical variants I am the project director of the Electronic Grosseteste, a research resource that provides access to electronic medieval Latin texts and an integrated bibliography. The textbase is composed of a variety of Latin texts (most of them under copyright but still searchable). Right now the search engine is pretty primitive, and one enhancement I would like to make is to account for orthographical variants in the texts. Some texts were classicized, while other editors followed either the orthography of a single manuscript or attempted to follow some sort of convention based generally on Latin texts in later medieval England (these are the facts, and this post is not about the joy of debating editorial practice). Ideally, I would like to allow searches to include returns for classical and "medieval" spellings. For example, if a user queried "scientia" the engine would return matches for "scientia" and "sciencia". (wildcards are permitted, btw). Now I work in Perl5, and so my initial thought was to create a set of hash tables that would map these variants since hashes would allow for more than one variant per entity, and the engine would then perform a lookup for each query element. Now I suppose coding into the engine the "orthographical rules" is another option, but I'll be honest and admit that computational linguistics has never been my thing. And, the beauty of hashes in Perl is that they are compiled very quickly, and don't eat too much memory. Now before I go and reinvent the wheel with these hash tables, does anyone know of an open-source method or resource that addresses this kind of problem (I know that Brepols--pardon me, Brepolis...yeesh---has this all figured out but they don't play will with others, so that's a closed door.). My limited scouring of the web has yielded no joy, and so I seek the sage advice of this community. Many thanks Jim -------------------- Dr James R. Ginther, PhD Assoc. Professor of Medieval Theology & Director of Graduate Studies Dept of Theological Studies St Louis University ginthej(a)slu.edu --------------------------------- dept: http://theology.slu.edu/ research: http://www.grosseteste.com/

1 0

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

dm-l